Maybe I'm just too old of a gamer, with money to spend on games and I expect better.

Not exactly staggering, but then consider this is an expansion for $15 and not a full priced game. Also have to contemplate the fact that Battlefield maps are large enough to incorporate the vehicles involved and as such each map is significantly larger than maps from most other shooters.

Considering people paid the same price for Modern Warfare's map packs that included 5 maps each a quarter of the size of a battlefield map. And Vietnam also offers 6 new vehicles and 15 new weapons, it's a safe bet to say it's far more deserving of the money than MW2's map packs were.

That may not make it worthwhile enough for you, but what expansions can you recall that offer more? Especially considering expansions used to generally cost $20-30 and this one is only $15.

I have to wonder what games he's speaking of when he suggests WW2 games have become bogged down in reverence and historical accuracy.

A "story-driven WWII shooter that will emphasize high adventure..." sounds exactly like every recent WW2 shooter to date, CoD 1&2, both story driven, cinematic titles with big explosions and tons of epicness for the sake of epicness. MoH series was much the same, albeit a bit more of a muted storyline, not at contingent on explosions and 'OMG you almost died!' moments like CoD.

What other WW2 games were released? BF1942? That certainly wasn't about historical accuracy. Mortyr? An alternate history based game. RtCW had freaking zombies in it. The original Wolfenstein had Hitler's head on a giant mechanized body for jebus' sake.

I can't actually think of ANY WW2 shooters that were about historical accuracy. The MoH series probably came the closest but it was a longshot from actually achieving it.

The only thing I can think of that HASN'T been done yet is to make a game that's set in WWII where the story isn't actually about the war or some specific set of engagements. Show me a GTA style free roam game set in WWII, or a heist game where I'm part of a group trying to steal something expensive from the Nazi's for my own profit rather than some secret allied mission to save the world. Show me ANYTHING but another WW2 shooter that's fixated on a single allied soldier in WW2 who somehow makes the difference between winning and losing the war.

Really, that's all this sounds like to me. Another arcade WW2 shoot-em up with lots of explosions and an (EPIC x infinity) storyline where you singlehandedly save the world.

Edit: Apologies, forgot about Red Orchestra (not sure how). That could certainly be categorized as a reverent and historically accurate portrayal (or attempt thereof) of WW2 in shooter format.

justice7 wrote on Nov 20, 2010, 12:58:i'd like to see Myth: The Fallen Lords redone .....

Hells yes. One of the few games with an aptly titled "Legendary" difficulty setting. I beat exactly 1 level on that difficulty and I still remember it to this day.

Just minding my business, setting up my sparse few soldiers, looking about for enemies. Find one, kill it... then look up at the minimap and see it slowly turning red from the top down. "?? What the hell is that? ... Oh dear god." It's not a graphic bug, there's just that many enemies. Cheesed my way through it by having my only surviving sapper flee from the horde of shuffling zombies, leading them in a big circle around the map and occasionally pausing to toss a det pack back at them.

Sadly, that franchise is probably lost to history much like many others that deserve a place in modern gaming.

Yes, it's absolutely true. I found that out while replaying the missions, hunting for intel. If you play like you're incompetent and just wander around aimlessly until the npcs start yelling at you, then run up to the next script trigger point, they'll clear up any remaining enemies and move on while you just stand around and try not to get shot.

It's a pity so many games for the uber scripted approach. But then, it's a CoD title, so you pretty much have to be expecting exactly that. I'm not sure I can recall the last time I actually enjoyed single player in a shooter... maybe SWAT 4.

Having watched the videos, I find it hard to consider this any more a tactical fps than Call of Duty is. Add to that the graphics and sounds that don't even seem on par with CS:Source, much less games like Black Ops, Medal of Honor, Bad Company, etc and I think the price point is going to have a larger impact on whether it does well than the gameplay.

If this thing ships at anything higher than $20, it'll be laughed off store shelves before it even sells a single copy.

Guess it's time to find my copy of SWAT 4 again and re-install that and cry myself to sleep over what's considered 'tactical' today.

Interestingly enough a quick google search turns up several different companies that all supposedly own or at least filed for a trademark over the colour purple. Cadbury apparently owns the use of purple (at least pertaining to chocolate sales) in australia. Kimberly-Clark owns it pertaining to disposable gloves, registering the trademark in 2006.

It's just one more of those legal oddities.

To the best of my knowledge, Cadbury is the only one of the bunch that actually made it a point to prosecute another chocolatier for using the colour purple on their packaging.

More important than that little point is that when you claim to be "stating facts" then you are no longer giving your opinion. While you may like to think that they fuck things up all the time and do everything wrong, the world as a whole proves you wrong every single day, with every single new account created. How many years old and still growing? Yeah, they fuck everything right up don't they?

Of course you'll point to a dozen other trolls like yourself who claim to know better than anyone else about how the game "should" be, and you'll somehow try to insult anyone who's perfectly happy with the game, simply because you aren't. At some point along the way you have to stop and think... maybe it's you. How can millions upon millions of people be playing the game and be happy enough with it to keep paying and keep playing while you mire away in anger, frustration and self-pity because you think you know better about how the game "should" be?

Eh. People seriously make way too big a deal about it being tax funded, trying to play like they're owed something for their 'contribution' to the game's funding. The reality is that the average person in the US pays $0.02 per year toward the game.

The fact that people feel the need to obsess over that tiny an amount of cash and must consistently point out that it's not "free" because they paid a whole 2 cents last year for it is about as anal and petty as you can get if you ask me.

Don't know what realm people are on that they're claiming 3 weeks of instability. My server is a high pop server and while the server was messed up the day of the patch until 9 or 10pm, it's been flawless since.

Its the children who sit down and whine instead of using the brain to understand that the game has temporarily changed. As this plague spreads across the land.

Which is of course your attempt at trying to seem older. I know many people 30+ who are irritated as hell about this event.

It's not the zombies, it's not the fact that you can get infected. It's the fact that douchebags are making it a point to kill off as many flight masters in obscure locations as they can, leaving you to either spend the extra half hour walking somewhere, or waiting on the mob to respawn only to be infected yourself, die and respawn just in time to watch them kill the flight master again.

The story is interesting. The implementation is pathetic and poorly thought out. They should at the very least have the healers standing beside all the flight masters alongside some heavy duty 75+ guards that will destroy anyone trying to kill flight masters. I could care less about any other npcs.

I remember when some stores sold hl2 a couple days early, valve refused to let them unlock their RETAIL COPIES THEY BOUGHT to play. They had to wait until the actual day of release, and it wasn't midnight that day either.

It's funny to me that you blame Valve for that and not the stores that sold the copies early, even though THEY knew full well that Valve had no intention of unlocking the games before the official release day.

Anyone with an ounce of knowledge would know that putting stuff in quotes (as in you make quotes with your fingers) means you're not 100 percent sure on the actual details.

Actually, they mean the exact opposite. When you put things in quotes, it means you are DIRECTLY quoting something (as in, you are repeating word for word of what someone else has said), or as stated by someone else, are referencing a title of something. Quotes NEVER mean you are not 100 percent sure on what's inside them, not even if you're tacky enough to use the whole "quotes with your fingers" thing.This comment was edited on Oct 25, 2008, 01:09.

Open world PvP existed a hell of a long time before WAR came out too. So did the idea of levelling through PvP. I don't know why this douche thinks they did something so original that they can call other people out on it.

Well now. This sealed the deal for me. I was waffling about cancelling my pre-order for WotLK, but this money milking scheme has made the decision for me. Act/Bliz the next EA. There seems to be execs there that need to be donkey-punched in the face until they're in a coma.

Rofl. Whine a little more, you belligerent, angst filled moron. They're offering a new service, possibly charging for it and rather than realizing that if you just ignore it, then NOTHING CHANGES FOR YOU. The game is exactly the same. Yes, how dare they offer something that you don't have to pay for that has nothing more than a superficial effect on the game. As a matter of fact, how dare they add bear mounts to an instance that requires that you spend a lot of time in game raiding and learning how to play to acquire. Damn money grubbing bastards... all they want is for you to play more and keep spending your money. They should have just given those mounts away for free!

All I can say now is I'm glad I won't be seeing you in game (if you're not flat out lying as I suspect you are about canceling). One less whiny tool to deal with, only a few million more to go.

Weren't Tom Clancy books *always* about subterfuge and never brute military might? What's the game going to consist of, you guiding one commando unit around a druglord's hacienda looking for hostages?

The book itself is pretty mediocre. Had a delayed flight and picked it up at a bookstore in the airport to read through while I waited and while I normally enjoy Tom Clancy books, this one was... well, pretty dull.

It does, however involve larger scale conflicts than Rainbow Six and much of the Jack Ryan series so in this case, an RTS isn't really out of the question. Though I get the impression this book was written based on the game rather than the other way around, which may explain why it's lacking in depth.